Roshan Lal And Others vs Dr.Ramesh Chander Sharma And Others on 17 February, 2011

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Roshan Lal And Others vs Dr.Ramesh Chander Sharma And Others on 17 February, 2011

Bench: Ram Chand Gupta

Civil Revision No.1146 of 2011(O&M)                                -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT                OF PUNJAB           AND      HARYANA          AT
                                CHANDIGARH.

                                       Civil Revision No.1146 of 2011(O&M)
                                       Date of Decision: February 17, 2011

Roshan Lal and others
                                                            .....Petitioners
                                  v.

Dr.Ramesh Chander Sharma and others
                                                            .....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA

Present:       Mr.Sumit Sangwan, Advocate
               for the petitioners.

                     .....

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

C.M.No.4790-CII of 2011 Application is allowed subject to all just objections.

Civil Revision No.1146 of 2011 The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside orders dated 26.11.2010 and 18.11.2006, Annexures P1 and P2, passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Charkhi Dadri, vide which evidence of petitioner-plaintiffs has been closed.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned orders passed by learned trial Court.

Brief facts relevant for the decision of present revision petition are that a suit for recovery of Rs.10,00,000/- in forma pauperis was filed by present petitioners for compensation on account of death of wife of petitioner no.1-Roshan Lal and mother of petitioner nos.2 to 4, namely, Smt.Roshni Devi due to negligence at the part of respondent nos.1 and 2.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that evidence of petitioners was closed just after three opportunities being granted to them and however due to negligence of counsel conducting the Civil Revision No.1146 of 2011(O&M) -2- case of present petitioners, a very material witness, namely, Dr.Usha Sharma, who treated the deceased before her death in PGIMS, Rohtak, could not be examined. Hence, he requests that only one opportunity be granted to petitioner-plaintiffs to examine the said witness at their own responsibility.

Hence, in view of these facts, the present revision petition is accepted. Impugned orders passed by learned trial Court are set aside to the extent that evidence of petitioner-plaintiffs was closed. Learned trial Court is directed to grant one effective opportunity to petitioner-plaintiffs to examine the Medical Officer from PGIMS, Rohtak, alongwith relevant record. However, petitioner is burdened with cost of Rs.1,000/-, which shall be a condition precedent.

Disposed of accordingly.





17.2.2011                                         (Ram Chand Gupta)
meenu                                                  Judge

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court